COLGATE PALMOLIVE INDIA LTD Vs. SATISH ROHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have filed thisss petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the criminal proceedings of the Criminal Complaint R. T. No. 604 of 2000 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhopal, and for quashing the order dated 25-11-1999 passed by the aforesaid Court, taking cognizance of offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 78 and 79 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958.

(2.) COMPLAINANT Satish Rohra, a resident of Idgah Hills, Bhopal, filed a complaint against the petitioner-Company, its officers and Directors contending that the petitioner-Company is the manufacturer of the Colgate Dental Cream. Being prompted and induced by the advertisements made by the Company in various newspapers and Television to the effect that by the use of aforesaid Colgate Dental Cream his teeth will remain healthy, he purchased one 50 Grams Carton of Colgate Tooth Paste from Darvesh Medical Store, Bhopal, on 1-2-1999, which he had been using from the past also. He made allegation in the complaint that the aforesaid tooth paste was not being manufactured in the manner it was being advertised and the petitioners were deceiving their customers. According to him, the Carton of the tooth paste bears the statement that it stops "bad breath" and "fights tooth decay" and that the product is a 'non-fluoridated foaming tooth paste', whereas it is a well known scientific fact that among all the inorganic ingredients of tooth paste the only substance that may play a role in fighting tooth decay prevention of cavities is flouride. At any rate the Colgate Dental Cream does not contain such ingredients which are either connected with stopping bad breath or fighting tooth decay. According to him, the aforesaid descriptions were pertaining to standard of quality and the accused/petitioners wrongly claimed their product to behave in a manner in which it was incapable of performing. The statement mentioned on the carton was repeated in advertisements in the news papers, magazines and Television media, creating an impression in the minds of consumers that the aforesaid tooth paste was capable of stopping bad breath and preventing tooth decay. Complainant claimed that the aforesaid description was false and misleading and the said false trade description had been deliberately applied with common intent to increase sales of the tooth paste. He averred that all the accused were financially benefiting from the sale of these illicit products. Thus, the non-petitioner/complainant prayed that the petitioners be punished for the commission of offences under the provisions of Sections 78 and 79 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) LEARNED Magistrate after recording the statement of complainant under Section 200 of Cr. PC and that of A. W. 2 Jawahar Tahalramani and A. W. 3 Raj Kumar Goswami under Section 202 of Cr. PC, registered the complaint and taking cognizance against the petitioner under the aforesaid offences issued process for their appearance.